Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Executives Receive One-Third of All Pay in the U.S.

Posted by Pat Garofalo, Think Progress at 5:00 AM on July 22, 2009.


Between 1979 and 2006, the inflation-adjusted after-tax income of the richest 1 percent of households increased by 256 percent.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of Social Security Administration data, more than one-third of all pay in the U.S. now goes to executives and other highly-paid employees:

Executives and other highly compensated employees now receive more than one-third of all pay in the U.S., according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of Social Security Administration data — without counting billions of dollars more in pay that remains off federal radar screens that measure wages and salaries. Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total U.S. pay in 2007, the latest figures available. The compensation numbers don’t include incentive stock options, unexercised stock options, unvested restricted stock units and certain benefits.

 

Between 1979 and 2006, the inflation-adjusted after-tax income of the richest 1 percent of households increased by 256 percent, compared to 21 percent for families in the middle income quintile. Despite these numbers, Democratic leaders, “bowing to unease among lawmakers and governors in their own party,” are reconsidering the House Ways and Means committee’s proposal to implement a surtax on the richest one percent of Americans as a way of financing a portion of health care reform. The Wonk Room has more.

Digg!

Tagged as: taxes, ceo, executive pay


After Conceding, Then Unconceding, Then Conceding, Then Unconceding, NY Conservative Concedes
Doug Hoffman today issued a statement in which he admitted Bill Owens won the NY-23 special election.
Post by Amanda Terkel. November 24, 2009.
China on Reducing Its Carbon Footprint: Why Should We Have to?
They've got a point. Per capita, China only produces 20 percent of America's carbon emissions.
Post by Robert Dreyfuss. November 24, 2009.
Supremes to Decide if Idle Rich's Scenic Ocean Views More Important than Public Beaches, the Environment
A popular coastal reclamation program is being threatened by short-sighted scumbags.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 24, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I suggest we whack all of the execs and give everybody a decent raise. No one will
Posted by: thekidde on Jul 22, 2009 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
miss them and their self-aggrandizing and more productive outcomes would result without their MBA-driven interference.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

why?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford on Jul 22, 2009 8:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why do we tolerate this? I advocate the old Eisenhower 90% tax cap. Make people realize that being at the top means being responsible. And if that doesn't work, then perhaps it's time to take back our money by force. It is, after all, OUR money. Be it money we spent via healthcare, consumer products, cars, houses, loans, etc. or our tax dollars going into their pockets. One way or another, it's all our money. It's time to stop begging to get it back and just take it back.

True, we'd all love to have those huge mansions, but are we all at least in agreement that such things are unnecessary? That no one really NEEDS to live that luxuriously?

If I had a million dollars, I'd be set for life. These people make SEVERAL million dollars EACH YEAR! NO ONE, I repeat, NO ONE needs that sort of luxury when other human beings are starving in the streets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: why? Posted by: whogrant
The only answer is...
Posted by: Quannah on Jul 22, 2009 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SOCIALISM. ;-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yea, when have they done us any favors?
Posted by: sasquuatch55 on Jul 22, 2009 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
nt

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America Rewards Failure
Posted by: FoonTheElder on Jul 23, 2009 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big American corporations continue to reward the people at the top whether they succeed or fail. It is no wonder that when you reward failure, you get more failure.

It's no wonder that top management is little more than a bunch of monopolist big talkers who only care about manipulating the stock price in order to put their stock options in the money. Even if they completely fail, they are still rewarded with giant bonuses. At the same time, they act as if a 3% wage increase will kill the company.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: America Rewards Failure Posted by: alexandra_hamilton
Trickle Down Theory
Posted by: ChasMayfld on Jul 23, 2009 7:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think our right wing hero Ronald Reagan's idea was that our nations wealth should trickle down to the middle and lower class. The more compensation, tax cuts, salary increases, bonuses, stock options, the top 1% get the more money they can then trickle down to the rest of the 99% folks.
It works just find, look at Mexico where a wide gap has always existed between the top 1% of their nations wealthiest.
You wouldn't want our country to be more like Canada or Europe where they have those Socialist Programs like Universal Health Care.
If we could just get rid of our socialist programs like the Republicans fought but lost the fight against FDR when a left wing Democratic Congress that makes todays left look like conservatives, passed then implemented Social Security in the 1930's. And what about our socialist medical systems for the elderly like Medicare and the State run socialist health program for our children like the State run Chip program. And our State run Socialist Public Education system and Postal System just to name a few.
Do you realize how much more money could trickle down from the wealthiest to the rest of the 99% if we were to rid the country of all our Socialist Programs ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Trickle Down Theory Posted by: mattylou
CAN YOU SAY PLUTOCRACY ?
Posted by: TFYQA on Jul 23, 2009 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Plutocracy (plutarchy) is rule by the wealthy, or power provided by wealth.

In a plutocracy, the degree of economic inequality is high while the level of social mobility is low.

How Goldman Sachs is Behind for Everything Wrong with the Economy
linked text

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Looking at past and present
Posted by: straav on Jul 23, 2009 8:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interesting to look at this web page and convert the Ducats to Dollars? Also recall most feudal systems had only a few percent of the population as the aristocracy.
http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Various_.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Call a "CEO" day,and let them do the work.
Posted by: hardwroc on Jul 23, 2009 10:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A general strike day where only the "executives" show up would probably get their attention for a moment. First, no limo, the driver called in "sick". No busses, taxis, no nothing, normally supplied by "the little people" that are not considered essential.

And when everything grinds to a halt a message is delivered; "that we are needed, even more than the self important empty suit sucking a third of the profits into his own pockets and then crying poormouth when the employees ask for a living wage".

Study Japan's executives, and they ethics. By their standards, we should have seen mass suicides on Wall st.
And an executive there is NOT paid anything close to the obscene thieves here.
Picture a cardboard stand up caricature of a CEO at a meeting, would IT not offer nearly as much as the live one?
And they answer with threats to "offshore" for cheaper labor. We could do likewise for cheaper executives as well could we not?

And lastly, IF a US company wants to send it's jobs to India, the executives should all be required to go with it. Let's see if the increased profits are as sweet in the 3rd world country they exploit for labor.

Passing the EFCA for unions is essential to help wage challenges to this CLASS WARFARE ALREADY WAGED ON LABOR IN AMERICA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't forget the Athletes and Celebraties
Posted by: vertical on Jul 23, 2009 12:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree your average executive is not worth the money they get, but I resent themm less than athletes and celebraties because to become a CEO one is working 100 whour work weeks and studied hard to get a good education. I give athletes half a pass because thay have to work hard to get in the physical shape to do what they do. But a celebraty can be both stupid and lazy and make a fortune. For instance, both Charlie Sheen and Paris Hilton are high school drop uots. If you and I drop out of high school it is minnimum wage hell for life because we do not have nepotism working for us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So ! ... Tax the hell out of them ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Jul 23, 2009 6:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We could use the money!

It's time to go back to Pre Reagan Tax Rates ... on high income, capital gains, dividends and estates ...

Let 'em earn all they want ... but tax 'em 50% at 500k, 60% at 1 mil and 70% over 5mil ...

This money could be used for single payer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

tax them
Posted by: Charlow on Jul 24, 2009 5:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is only fair that they pay for any increased costs to reform our health care system, even though I doubt that the reform needed would result in any increase in what WE are paying for health care now.

Plus, a return to a properly graduated income tax system, with the top bracket at 90% as was the case when our country was truly middle class, during the Eisenhower administration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the top benefits while workers get screwed
Posted by: dealmeinfo2 on Jul 27, 2009 10:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its been the people at the top that are really benefiting and making all the money. While the people who actually do the work, the workers are the one getting screwed by these people in control. Something needs to be done, come on Obama.



---------------------------------------------------
list of mortgage lenders

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]